Perhaps of note: there's a bit of a "vintage digital camera" fashion trend among teenagers. Just like the "VHS aesthetic", I think it's cute, but there's also a lot of pseudoscientific babble outlining the supposed advantages of CCD over CMOS - including the claim that they deliver a more "film-like" look.
In reality, CCD and CMOS use the same physical principle for light measurement. CCD is simpler to make, but has a much wonkier readout process. Any visual differences are almost certainly due to software postprocessing - tone mapping, noise reduction, etc.
I found your insight about inferior technologies adopted, and replacing former superior technologies (transistor vs. tube, digital vs. film cameras) very interesting. Remembers me the book "Homo Sapiens" by Hariri, where he wonders why humanity adopted agriculture, though it led to a lifestyle objectively significantly inferior to the hunter and gatherer lifestyle, and it took centuries - if not millenia - to become superior. Maybe a pattern?
Perhaps of note: there's a bit of a "vintage digital camera" fashion trend among teenagers. Just like the "VHS aesthetic", I think it's cute, but there's also a lot of pseudoscientific babble outlining the supposed advantages of CCD over CMOS - including the claim that they deliver a more "film-like" look.
In reality, CCD and CMOS use the same physical principle for light measurement. CCD is simpler to make, but has a much wonkier readout process. Any visual differences are almost certainly due to software postprocessing - tone mapping, noise reduction, etc.
I found your insight about inferior technologies adopted, and replacing former superior technologies (transistor vs. tube, digital vs. film cameras) very interesting. Remembers me the book "Homo Sapiens" by Hariri, where he wonders why humanity adopted agriculture, though it led to a lifestyle objectively significantly inferior to the hunter and gatherer lifestyle, and it took centuries - if not millenia - to become superior. Maybe a pattern?